Clinton vs Woods Cross

Which is the better fit for you?

Clinton, UT
68
Area Score
Top 19% nationally
Woods Cross, UT
69
Area Score
Top 18% nationally

Want a third or fourth place beside these? Open them in the shortlist and add more.

Woods Cross receives the higher standardized Area Score. That reflects AreaProfile's weighting, not a judgment about which place is better to live in.

If you are moving

What the difference in prices, rent, homes and weather comes to, using the published figures for the two places. Add your income to see what it would take to keep pace.

Moving from Clinton to Woods Cross

It stays in this browser and is never sent anywhere.

Everyday prices
About the same
Regional price level 96.1 against 96.1 (US = 100). Both places sit in the same price region, so the index cannot tell them apart.
Income to keep the same purchasing power
Enter your household income to see it.
A new two-bedroom lease
The same
HUD benchmarks it at $1,614 in Woods Cross against $1,614 in Clinton.
The median home
11% more
$497,400 in Woods Cross against $449,100 in Clinton.
The weather you would swap
Winters 3°F milder
Normal January lows are 24°F in Woods Cross against 21°F in Clinton; July highs are 94°F against 91°F (summers 3°F hotter).

These are differences between published figures, not a forecast of your budget. Income and sales taxes, commuting, schools, insurance and the job you would actually get are not in them, and a price index describes a metropolitan area, so two places in one metro read the same. HUD’s rent is a benchmark for a new lease, not a listing.

Signals

Clinton
Woods Cross
Opportunity: Woods Cross is the more favorable of the two.
Opportunity
64 · Top 33%
vs
66 · Top 30%
Growth: Woods Cross is the more favorable of the two.
Growth
58 · Top 33%
vs
62 · Top 26%
Climate: Clinton is the more favorable of the two.
Climate
60 · Bottom 14%
vs
55 · Bottom 6%
Physical resilience
83 · Top 20%
vs
83 · Top 20%
Housing affordability: Clinton is the more favorable of the two.
Housing affordability
69 · Top 42%
vs
67 · Top 50%
Schools
63 · Top 33%
vs
63 · Top 32%
Access
99 · Top 9%
vs
99 · Top 9%
Economic stability: Woods Cross is the more favorable of the two.
Economic stability
67 · Top 30%
vs
76 · Top 10%

Measured values

MetricClintonWoods CrossSource period
Population23,61211,5312024 ACS 5-Year
Median household income — the two are too close to separate$116,194 ±$7,839$120,543 ±$12,9892024 ACS 5-Year
Per capita income$36,709$46,530 — more favorable2024 ACS 5-Year
Population density3,979/sq mi3,008/sq mi2024 ACS 5-Year
Median home value$449,100$497,4002024 ACS 5-Year
Median gross rent — the two are too close to separate$1,698 ±$223$1,771 ±$1652024 ACS 5-Year
Market rent, two bedroom$1,614$1,614FY2026
Cost of living index96.196.12023
Homeownership rate90.9%81.0%2024 ACS 5-Year
Unemployment rate3.3%3.3%July 2026
Employment change (year over year)−1.4%−1.4%July 2026
Bachelor's degree or higher26.9%33.5% — more favorable2024 ACS 5-Year
Poverty rate — the two are too close to separate6.9% ±3%4.5% ±2%2024 ACS 5-Year
Housing units permitted (12 months)724712 months ending July 2026
Permits per 1,000 residents3.04.1 — more favorable12 months ending July 2026
Permit change (year over year)+35.8%+123.8%12 months ending July 2026
Average July high91°F94°F1991-2020 Normals
Average January low21°F24°F1991-2020 Normals
Annual precipitation16.4"15.5"1991-2020 Normals
Distance to major airport5 mi — more favorable7 miNASR current cycle
Average commute26.3 min21.8 min — more favorable2024 ACS 5-Year
Median age33.032.12024 ACS 5-Year
Students per teacher22.722.2 — more favorable2024-25 school year
Math proficiency50.2% — more favorable47.4%2018-19 school year
Reading proficiency53.0%55.6% — more favorable2018-19 school year

A bolded value is the more favorable of the two where the metric has a clear direction. Metrics like population and density have no inherent better or worse and are shown unweighted.

3 rows above show both figures with a ± margin and neither in bold. Those come from the American Community Survey, which samples rather than counts, and the gap between the two is smaller than the uncertainty on the figures themselves — so the survey did not find a difference to report, and calling either one the winner would be reading a result out of noise.

The number of units permitted is not marked because the larger place always permits more; the per-resident rate is the fair comparison. The year-over-year change is not marked either: a percentage on fewer than 300 units swings on a handful of permits.

Your best match

Weight what matters to you. Your preferences stay in this browser and never change either Area Score.

Clinton
—
Clinton: Your Score
68
Area Score
Woods Cross
—
Woods Cross: Your Score
69
Area Score

Select your priorities to see which of the two fits them better.

Full profiles: Clinton, UT · Woods Cross, UT · How this is calculated: methodology